"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

Then this response by ULA must REALLY piss you off:

ULA is deeply concerned with this ruling and we will work closely with the Department of Justice to resolve the injunction expeditiously. In the meantime, ULA will continue to demonstrate our commitment to our National Security on the launch pad by assuring the safe delivery of the missions we are honored to support.

SpaceX's attempt to disrupt a national security launch contract so long after the award ignores the potential implications to our National Security and our nation's ability to put Americans on board the International Space Station. Just like ULA, NASA and numerous other companies lawfully conduct business with the same Russian company, other Russia state-owned industries, and Russian Federation agencies. This opportunistic action by SpaceX appears to be an attempt to circumvent the requirements imposed on those who seek to meet the challenging launch needs of the nation and to avoid having to follow the rules, regulations and standards expected of a company entrusted to support our nation's most sensitive missions.

"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

I didn't read it that way -- he's not saying he's an uninvolved third party just looking to do some good in the world. He's saying "give us a chance to win the contract at least." He's not saying they're special and different from the established players, which is exactly the point. Why default to a non-compete contract when competition does exist?

//There are, however, certain issues with SpaceX not yet being certified to actually do the launches, but that is largely being viewed as a minor issue that will inevitably be resolved shortly.

haemaker:ULA is deeply concerned with this ruling and we will work closely with the Department of Justice to resolve the injunction expeditiously. In the meantime, ULA will continue to demonstrate our commitment to our National Security on the launch pad by assuring the safe delivery of the missions we are honored to support.

SpaceX's attempt to disrupt a national security launch contract so long after the award ignores the potential implications to our National Security and our nation's ability to put Americans on board the International Space Station. Just like ULA, NASA and numerous other companies lawfully conduct business with the same Russian company, other Russia state-owned industries, and Russian Federation agencies. This opportunistic action by SpaceX appears to be an attempt to circumvent the requirements imposed on those who seek to meet the challenging l ...

"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

ULA is pissed because they will have to lower their prices. ULA was supposed to lower prices but they've done nothing but go up. ULA is 2 major competitors deciding to work with each other. The prices increases were inevitable.

Tobin_Lam:ULA is pissed because they will have to lower their prices. ULA was supposed to lower prices but they've done nothing but go up. ULA is 2 major competitors deciding to work with each other. The prices increases were inevitable.

Hopefully, Boeing and Lockheed have been saving up their massive profits. All they have to do is start eating into them to undercut SpaceX and the other company. Boeing or Lockheed eats into profits for a bit to score the contracts, SpaceX goes out of business, and ULA is back in business.

Tobin_Lam:Hopefully, Boeing and Lockheed have been saving up their massive profits. All they have to do is start eating into them to undercut SpaceX and the other company. Boeing or Lockheed eats into profits for a bit to score the contracts, SpaceX goes out of business, and ULA is back in business.

"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

I heard some inside info on this last week. Basically it's not that the gov't didn't want to give him the contracts because they don't like him. There are some contracts which SpaceX hasn't demonstrated the capability to handle yet. They very much want to have another vendor, but at this time it was considered a better idea to go with the vendor who has been doing it. They are open to SpaceX, they're just being cautious for reliability reasons At least that's what I heard, I'm not providing sources.

New Farkin User Name:Tobin_Lam: Hopefully, Boeing and Lockheed have been saving up their massive profits. All they have to do is start eating into them to undercut SpaceX and the other company. Boeing or Lockheed eats into profits for a bit to score the contracts, SpaceX goes out of business, and ULA is back in business.

Hopefully?

Only if you're an investor in Boeing or Lockheed. Hopefully was probably the wrong word. I'd like SpaceX to be successful.

"This is not SpaceX protesting and saying these launches should be awarded to us," Musk said at the news conference. "We're just saying these launches should be competed. If we compete and lose, that's fine. But why would they not even compete it? That doesn't make sense."

Well, that's obviously a lie, since he obviously does want the launches awarded to SpaceX. And I'm not so sure that this isn't just whining from an upstart government contractor who's pissed that the established government contractors are the ones getting the money. I like SpaceX because I think they're doing cool things, but I guess I don't fully understand what makes them different from somebody like TRW, Orbital, or Rocketdyne. And he's right, this probably should have been bid and competed for, since SpaceX thinks they have the tech to stand toe-to-toe and the contract runs for something like 30 years. But still, don't tell me you're just doing this because it's the right thing to do and you're all about fair play and sportsmanship. I know bullshiat when I hear it.

I heard some inside info on this last week. Basically it's not that the gov't didn't want to give him the contracts because they don't like him. There are some contracts which SpaceX hasn't demonstrated the capability to handle yet. They very much want to have another vendor, but at this time it was considered a better idea to go with the vendor who has been doing it. They are open to SpaceX, they're just being cautious for reliability reasons At least that's what I heard, I'm not providing sources.

"It's true, your Honor, this man has no dick."..."Well that's what I heard!"

Any speculation on how many more first stage splashdowns before SpaceX is landing on the pad? Maybe a half dozen before SpaceX can severely undercut their competitions pricing? I realize an Atlas V military launch is some where in the neighborhood of 3-4 times what SpaceX estimates theirs will cost already, so maybe it doesn't matter that much.

The tenth Falcon launch is (hopefully) this Saturday and on May 29th the Dragon Mk 2 is unveiled. Crazy times we live in...unless your ULA and then it's nothing but bad news.

SewerSquirrels:Any speculation on how many more first stage splashdowns before SpaceX is landing on the pad? Maybe a half dozen before SpaceX can severely undercut their competitions pricing? I realize an Atlas V military launch is some where in the neighborhood of 3-4 times what SpaceX estimates theirs will cost already, so maybe it doesn't matter that much.

The tenth Falcon launch is (hopefully) this Saturday and on May 29th the Dragon Mk 2 is unveiled. Crazy times we live in...unless your ULA and then it's nothing but bad news.

Next launch they plan to try and land the first stage about a mile out from the ocean.

Having worked both sides of the fence, I can say that non-compete contracts are almost always awarded when the company winning the contract would fail in a competitive bid. I wouldn't be surprised if the ULA contract was also cost-plus.

SpaceX has done the required flights to qualify, but the Air Force is holding up the paperwork for approval.

When was the no-bid contract awarded and after how long? Did SpaceX participate early on or was it included in the process and determined that it lacked the capabilities presently and may not be available in the future? I am all in favor of SpaceX competing to ensure that the Department of Defense gets the best deal, but they have to have the capabilities to service the planed launches that are being contracted. Hypothetical capabilities they are planning to meet isn't sufficient capability as that launch date may approach and the rocket isn't ready. I am glad the court is looking into it to ensure the process was fair, but it may turn out that the no bid contract was the only option available for many launches as much as it pains me to suggest ULA may be a valid contract.

The sanctions aspect is a whole other issue that needs to be looked at separate from the no bid contract. I am happy that SpaceX raised that issue as the only way to cause sanctions to have an impact is to actually enforce them. Sanctions certainly can hurt the US companies, but you have to inflict pain locally in order to have an impact on Russia.

I heard some inside info on this last week. Basically it's not that the gov't didn't want to give him the contracts because they don't like him. There are some contracts which SpaceX hasn't demonstrated the capability to handle yet. They very much want to have another vendor, but at this time it was considered a better idea to go with the vendor who has been doing it. They are open to SpaceX, they're just being cautious for reliability reasons At least that's what I heard, I'm not providing sources.

fifthhorseman:The thing that really blew my mind about this is we were buying rocket engines from Russia to launch our spy satellites. Am I wrong to think this may not be the best national security idea?

My grandad worked in the soviet space program. Even during some of the darkest times of the Cold War, he said it was "business as usual" behind the scenes and in space vis-a-vis NASA and the Soviets....

I don't know if times have changed, but he told me the space people stayed above politics and put the boys (and girls) into space and brought them back down as safely as possible.